Google Bizopps Last Warning
- Thread starter Jon
- Start date
and I'd suspect like the other case their biggest gripe will be with advertisers with logos not belonging to them on their checkout pages and thus inferring they're endorsed by/associated with this larger party.
I believe the FTC has specific requirements for bizopp's that are unique from any other product sold in America (I only learned of this after browsing the FTC page on bizopps). I'm sure almost none of the "google" style bizopps comply w/ the terms.
They also have a page at: FTC : Business Opportunities dedicated purely to bizopp scams (redirect from Thinking of Buying a Business Opportunity?). Note the guy in the video simply worked as a salesguy at a bizopp callcenter and went to *jail* for 3 years. He didn't own the firm, nothing, just worked there and made commission on leads. The narrator in the video talks bout some of the requirements of a bizopp at the end of the video.
I am so glad I don't and never have promoted a single bizopp.
They also have a page at: FTC : Business Opportunities dedicated purely to bizopp scams (redirect from Thinking of Buying a Business Opportunity?). Note the guy in the video simply worked as a salesguy at a bizopp callcenter and went to *jail* for 3 years. He didn't own the firm, nothing, just worked there and made commission on leads. The narrator in the video talks bout some of the requirements of a bizopp at the end of the video.
I am so glad I don't and never have promoted a single bizopp.
Uhhh, no. Like jvincent said, Bizops are a different kind of animal and are subject to uniquely harsh punishments for misleading, deceiving, or ripping off consumers.
scare tactics are fun. I'm not saying this wasn't the case, but one needs to read between the lines. I've seen the inside of MANY debt consolidation shops, the shit they're pulling on a daily basis over the phones is ridiculous and you don't see phone operators going to jail there.
I REALLY doubt that guy "simply" worked as a salesman reading a script on the phone. I suspect instead he blatantly lied and knowingly accepted payment for services that he knew weren't rendered, and he knew this because of working inside the company (probably memos going back and forth, jokes about it, etc). A bit akin to some stock broker saying "I just worked at a sketchy company that's it" who goes down for insider trading. RIIIIIIGHT - how many sketchy ass brokers are there, how many actuall go to jail "just for working there." Bullshit. Plus of course you have the issue with marketing being who is selling the product or conducting the transaction, that's not to say affs aren't on the hook, obviously that's not the case.
But how many affs knew that Money Tree or whatever that offer was didn't send out anything? How many networks? How many laughed between memos with the idiot behind that about it? My guess is ZERO b/c they didn't work 10' away from him in the same office. There are obviously regulations we've all known this, however just b/c this one guy claims that's "all" he did I sincerely doubt it. If I sent traffic to Zappos via CJ and get paid and it turns out they're conducting a massive fraud which lands their executive team in jail how on earth am I lumped into the same bunch since I know nothing of their operations? *disclaimer- Zappos obviously picked at random, I've had nothing but great dealings with that company, my point is solely to show an example with a 'large/trustworthy' company.
Google huh? I thought they liked to stay away from lawsuits like this because it could force them to expose more information than they would like? If that's the case then during the discovery process just have your lawyer request the quality score algo, an unreasonably long list of admissions of facts regarding sensitive topics, and nice 5 hour long deposition about everything from advertiser billing and determining landing page relevance, to policies regarding affiliate marketers and their own internal campaigns. If you don't scare them away, at least you'll help out the rest of us 
FTC are quickly becoming my favorite gov department
Bye competitions
You don't realize that the FTC has agreements with jolly old England (and other countries) to prosecute people beyond the borders of the United States, do you?
Google huh? I thought they liked to stay away from lawsuits like this because it could force them to expose more information than they would like? If that's the case then during the discovery process just have your lawyer request the quality score algo, an unreasonably long list of admissions of facts regarding sensitive topics, and nice 5 hour long deposition about everything from advertiser billing and determining landing page relevance, to policies regarding affiliate marketers and their own internal campaigns. If you don't scare them away, at least you'll help out the rest of us
Or be able to make enough money selling it as an info product to pay for an army of scumbags (lawyers).
FTC are quickly becoming my favorite gov department
Bye competitions
Fuck that, I'm moving to London...
But there are also alot of countries where the FTC can't reach.
On another note although it is pretty obvious many of the google biz opp's are blatant lies and against the law, I would like to know more about the sources that Jon is sighting in his OP, not that I don't believe him just that I would like to know where I stand, before making a decision.
The FTC should stick to auditing/regulating Wallstreet (eg. high speed trading) and the Fed.
In the end, money talks.
1) Google/Oprah etc. > marketers
2) Wallstreet/Fed > investors
I forget who said America is the "best democracy money can buy."
In the end, money talks.
1) Google/Oprah etc. > marketers
2) Wallstreet/Fed > investors
I forget who said America is the "best democracy money can buy."